On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:33:43PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:42:59PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:31:17PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > On 11/06/16 20:59, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > > OpenSSL will soon release a new upstream version with a new
> > > > soname. This new version will break various packages, see:
> > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/06/msg00205.html
> > > >
> > > > I'm currently not sure when the release will be ready. I would
> > > > like to start this transition as soon as possible, but probably
> > > > after it's actually released. I don't expect this to take long.
> > >
> > > 405 packages failed to build during your test rebuild AFAICS. That's
> > > going to
> > > take some time to sort out...
> > >
> > > > If I'm ready to upload it to unstable, can I start this
> > > > transition? Are there things you want me to do?
> > >
> > > Please upload to experimental first and let us know when that's happened.
> > It's in experimental already. The test suite only fails
> > on hurd, for some reason it's not finding the engine. I still
> > need to look at that.
> > > We will also need bugs filed, with severity important for now.
> > Sure, I'll start on that if I find the time.
> > > Also it may be useful if you can get us the intersection between the
> > > packages
> > > that failed to build and the key packages (see "Final list of 3302 key
> > > source
> > > packages" in that file).
> > That actually seem to be 3247 source package. Anyway, the list is
> > below.
> So OpenSSL 1.1.0 was released about 3 weeks ago. Since then we've
> been working on the key packages, to get them to build with
> OpenSSL 1.1.0. You can see that status of that at:
> Most of the packages are really trivial to fix, but some do
> require that you fix the same issues in many different places and
> it can take some time to fix it.
> I would like to motivate more people to work on this by either
> marking those bugs as RC, or uploading it to unstable.